Question: How does this methodology technically assist in creating a balanced party, any more than one in which everyone generates their own character? Strictly speaking, you could theoretically end up still having x+1 strikers.

Well, inasmuch as each character will have what amounts to group control (not sure how well that will work) ... ::sigh:: Thank you for offer. At the end of the day, I'll let you know if I want you to take a second seat.

For everyone, @CRoss, @Iszi, @EricWeilnau Are you OK with the rough social contract that I laid out? That this will be looking at playtesting elements from answers on the site and may involve group based control of characters? While I'll keep RPing open, I think we'll leave significant RP elements (outside of a skill challenge I have in mind) for a different session.

Um, however you folks like? Physical dice are fun, the die roller built into this is also fun. I'll start with the assumption that you aren't cheaters and if necessary, will perform statistical analysis after the fact.

This is what I see: Good morning everyone. I'll be running a nice simple prepublished 4e adventure with group control of the characters to start. To start with is the ever fun character creation. Considering that there's a thread on this exact topic, I'd like to experiment with my suggested methodology. Minimum participation is 3 people. Deadline for expressing interest is... monday.

C. Ross @BrianBallsunStanton Can you link to the thread?

For everyone, @CRoss, @Iszi, @EricWeilnau Are you OK with the rough social contract that I laid out? That this will be looking at playtesting elements from answers on the site and may involve group based control of characters? While I'll keep RPing open, I think we'll leave significant RP elements (outside of a skill challenge I have in mind) for a different session.

@RMorrisey There's no real "contract" per se. Just the baseline expectations he laid out in those two posts.

@BrianBallsunStanton In the interests of facilitating international participation, it's come to my attention that it would be better for us to express dates and times (when necessary) in UTC. Example, the "Monday" deadline for race selection.

@Iszi I can't find the thread about character creation that is mentioned. "Character creation" doesn't produce any posts made by Brian in the first... 60 search results, and it doesn't show up on the first page of his profile

Throw me a line here. I was not in chat 2 or 3 days ago when this was planned. =/

Confession - I just TPK'd my group....again.
One of the reasons that has been identified is that while the party is composed of 5 pretty well optimized characters, as a party they just aren't in sync.
Examples:
The warlord grants basic attacks, 2 others don't have good basic attacks
3 charact...

Ok, I would consider myself a Tactician-type player. I am not sure, though, if I necessarily want to be the official party leader. I assume Leader is a character archetype in 4e? Which classes are available that fit the bill?

Why race first, then class? Brian's answer seems to suggest picking character role based on player role, then picking a good race to optimize that class. Am I supposed to start a new question for people to help create a character?

Come to think of it, I'm not sure why Brian said race first. Typically, when one is creating their own optimized character, they go for class first and then race. Although, the Character Builder does have you do race first as well.

Not to be a nuisance, but maybe a traditional forum format would be better suited for this kind of game? It feels like the only way to make this viable is to post a question for each character for character creation, and post a question for each character for each turn. I would much rather see a real-time game take place in the SE site chat

Fortunately the SE site chat doesn't require real-time participation, as it's a persistent room. The full history of the room is available to everyone whether they were in the room the entire time or not.

As far as the characters go, Brian has said that he'll be posting the fully-fleshed characters in iPlay4e.

(When they're done, of course.)

The parent site really wouldn't be an appropriate place to post questions regarding a game that not everyone is participating in.

In Brian's answer to the balanced party question (see the starred item, on the right), he suggests that the different character roles be chosen based on player roles. I therefore propose that each player should try to identify their player role, and post it here in chat. I am calling myself a Tactician.

Functionally speaking, we're choosing races first because we're not making characters for ourselves,we're making characters for the group and then everyone will principally control one character (but not exclusively, depending on what we decide)

Ok, I didn't understand that there was a rotation. I thought that each character would be designed by a committe of whoever wanted to contribute to that particular character role. Maybe you could state the rules a bit more clearly?

and if I remember, I think I can save a block of chat and then bookmark it? We'll see.

--- start of block ---

This current exercise has two objectives: to test the "optional group creation" method proposed in the balanced party thread and to assess the viability of this venue as a way of playtesting answers given on RPG stackExchange.

here is the methodology that we will follow:

1) Agree or suggest changes to the current social contract: That this will be looking at playtesting elements from answers on the site and may involve group based control of characters? While I'll keep RPing open, I think we'll leave significant RP elements (outside of a skill challenge I have in mind) for a different session.

2) To articulate your interest in this process, state a race that you would like to see in the party. Be advised that you may not end up playing the race you suggest, as people will be able to pick and choose from completed characters.

3) Once all participants have stated a race, sheets will be passed "to the left" (I'll articulate a table order) and people will then choose an "interesting" class for the race in front of them. Participants are advised to select according to some compatibility, as a race that has no stat boosts connected with a class is quite difficult to play.

4) Once players have identified classes, and class features. sheets will once again be passed to the left and players will select 2 backgrounds out of the 6 possible from any valid background source.

As part of this step, the group will have to agree on the nature of their adventuring party.

5) Step 4 is repeated once, so that two different players have input into the character's backgrounds.

6) With race/class/theme chosen, all sheets are then reviewed by everyone to make sure that they can form a consistent party. Once validated, all members of the group "choose" one character to play and to further flesh out. In this instance, they will be considered a primary player for the character, but not sole, depending on the rules we hammer out for the encounter after this process is completed.

7) Once people choose their character, they then choose whether they want the "default good" powers, a short list to choose from, or to choose from a long list. for default and short list, the GM is responsible for presenting a list of powers that fit with their requested tastes. For the long list, the GM is responsible for vetoing or buffing powers that are underpowered. Repeat with feats.

7a) Instead of choosing powers directly, players may instead describe "moments of awesome" that they would like to do. The GM is then directed to figure out how to fit a power to their moment of awesome.

If your expected to bring a character you should definitely bring that. If you're going to make a character there you should come with an idea about the following things (but remain flexible, you idea may not be exactly what you end up with).
Character name
Character race (Human, Dwarf, Elf, H...